·Subject "water" is placed in the Constitution in Entry
17 of List II (State List) of Schedule VII.

·However, the caveat is Entry 56 of List I (Union List), which
says, "Regulations and development of inter-state rivers and river valleys
to the extent to which such regulation and development under the control of the
Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest."

·Unfortunately, the Centre has made little use of the powers
vested in it vide Entry 56 of List I.

·The result is that by virtue of Article 246 read with Entry 17,
List II, states have exclusive jurisdiction over waters that are located within
their territories, including inter-state rivers and river valleys.

·It is arguably this status of water in the Constitution that
constrains the highest in the executive and the judiciary, despite their
pronouncements on and commitment to resolving the problem.

·It has also stopped the Centre from establishing allocation
rules and clearly defined water rights among states that have unending disputes
over the sharing of inter-state water resources.

·The latest example is the second Krishna Water Disputes
Tribunal, which has turned into a warzone, with a battery of lawyers, technical
staff and irrigation department officials from Maharashtra, Karnataka and
Andhra Pradesh fighting to win the maximum allocation of the Krishna
river for their respective state.

·Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of
International Watercourses : it is
a document adopted by the UN on May 21, 1997, pertaining to the use and
conservation of all waters that cross international boundaries, including
surface and ground water.

·Unfortunately, the convention is not yet ratified.

·Alongside the US,
China, Canada and Australia,
India
is among the major opponents of the CLNNUIW.